For the first time anywhere in the world, biotech agriculture giant Monsanto has admitted that insects have developed resistance to its Bt cotton crop. Field monitoring in parts of Gujarat has discovered that the Bt crop is no longer effective against the pink bollworm pest there.
The company is advocating that Indian farmers switch to its second-generation product to delay resistance further. Monsanto's critics say that this just proves the ineffectiveness of the Bt technology, which was recently sought to be introduced in India in Bt brinjal as well.
In November 2009, Monsanto's scientists detected unusual survival of the pink bollworm pest while monitoring the Bt cotton crop in Gujarat. In January and February, samples taken from the field were tested in Monsanto's laboratories. It has been confirmed that pink bollworm is now resistant to the pest-killing protein of Bt cotton in four districts — Amreli, Bhavnagar, Junagarh and Rajkot.
Until now, Monsanto has held that “there have been no confirmed cases of poor field performance of Bt cotton or Bt corn attributable to insect resistance.” Although there have been cases of insects resisting the technology in the laboratory, Monsanto held that “field resistance is the criterion of relevance to agricultural producers.”
Now that the company itself has admitted that its product has been proved ineffective against some insects on the fields of Gujarat, its advice to farmers is to start using its second generation product instead. “Farmers have another choice. We have a two-gene product called Bollgard II which has greater ability to delay resistance,” says Monsanto India's director of scientific affairs Rashmi Nair. She also recommends that farmers conduct better monitoring and plant “refuges,” or areas of non-Bt crop which would attract insects.
Agricultural scientists and activists say Monsanto's advice is “ridiculous”. The Bollgard II product has no additional toxin to combat pink bollworm, says G.V. Ramanjaneyulu of the Centre for Sustainable Agriculture. It is simply that as a newer product, Bollgard II will take longer for the pest to develop resistance. Anyway, the Bt toxin is only active for 90 days, while pink bollworm is a late season pest, he adds.
“All the hype about the effectiveness of Bt against pests is bogus …This proves that you can't stay ahead of the pest with … this shortsighted approach,” says Kavitha Kuruganti of the Kheti Virasat Mission. Indian farmers with small holdings cannot be expected to give up large parts of their land for non- productive “refuges,” added Dr. Ramanjaneyulu.
Monsanto's Dr. Nair says the Central Institute of Cotton Research (CICR) was informed about the resistance “about eight to ten days ago.” The CICR, which has been collaborating in the field monitoring of Bt cotton since 2003, has reported this to the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), she said. However, the Ministry of Environment and Forests seems to have been unaware of the test results until Monsanto issued a statement on Friday.
Over the last month, the GEAC and the Ministry have been at the centre of a storm regarding the government's moratorium on Bt brinjal's commercial release. Critics are now pointing to the ineffectiveness of Bt cotton in Gujarat to strengthen their case against Bt brinjal as well.
Keywords: Monsanto, Bt brinjal, Bt cotton, Gujarat




Comments:
What will it take before India bans Monsanto and starts to seriously encourage organic, sustainable, traditional farming instead? Many farmers have taken their lives due to corrupt and unethical practices of these bio-techs and failed policies of the Indian government.
What is important to point out in this story is that Bt was a natural insecticide that farmers could previously use. This 'common good' has been rendered ineffective in Cotton cultivation by Monsanto.
Simply put, Monsato's profits are dependent on destroying public property.
The company should be forced to compensate Indian farmers for their loss, so that the next Bt Plant that the company develops internalises the true costs of this technology, instead of saying My Gain, Your Loss!
Should anyone be surprised? It's a no-brainer. Insects have this consummate ability to adapt and no amount of tweaking via "cides" will work in a sustainable way. Worse, bt cotton is even more vulnerable to secondary insect pests. There will be bol II then III and on will go the fiasco as it has with the regular tribe of biocides since the green revolution began.
We need the real solutions - and that demands developing a healthy plant in a healthy soil - when will GR scientists wake up to this self evident truth.
Those acquainted with the history of Monsanto's Bt-cotton will remember the times when Monsanto first tried (in 1990s) to fob it off on India. Even at that time, cotton bollworm in many areas in USA had already developed resistance to Bt, and Monsanto was actually trying to sell us a defunct product. Fortunately for India, the scientist who had been sent to USA to negotiate with Monsanto, rejected Monsanto's offer. As I remember it, the price Monsanto asked for their Bt-cotton technology was $4000,000.
Its not that so easy to manipulate nature's settings in any organism.Until and unless a complete genome research is made in that particular organism. But the sorry state is that we in fact do not know when and where does a genome study end.Its all due to impatient and cut throat competition among research organisations.
The only way to a solution would be to be patien and be natural in arriving at any result in such type of researches.
It is not good to manipulate the gene pool, as we have seen that BG-II is not showing resistance against pink boll worm.Is it necessary to manipulate gene pool? Why agricultural scientists are not taking a step to develop elicitor molecule which is responsible for enhancing immune system. Evolution is a natural phenomenon and insect having a very short life cycle, so resistance is obvious. Genomincs and proteimics is not resticted to transgenic so scientific community should think about this.
What choice do we have? One reader says to use organic method. Does he have any proof that its economical and better? What yield can you expect from "traditional" farming?. Maybe for rich farmers who can have the luxury of space and economy and can rely of lesser profit margins can adopt "environment" friendly methods. If I had a choice between ever increasingly deadly toxic chemicals being sprayed to ward off insects and GM food, I will surely choose the latter.
Organic farming is the way nature has fed us for millions of years and gotten us this far. No proof is required for this, just because someone is ignorant. The situation is that India has scarcity of resources, so companies like Monsanto try to sell half baked products in the garb of alleviating hunger.
Almost all cotton area is under Bt cotton in India. If seed is not available in 2010 season what will the farmers do?
This monsoon we have to grow cotton in (north karnataka), but which cotton we have to go for" BT cotton or traditional one ?
I want more detail about refuges in Bt cotton & its detail mechanism or information.And please give me referances.
I live in Burkina Faso. The burkinabe government, well bribed by Monsanto, chose in 2003 to cultivate Bt cotton (400 000 hect. expected for 2010). This is an oncoming desaster : already pesticids must be spread 4 times (and not 2 times according to Monsanto) the Bt cotton is lighter than conventional,so the benefit is less for the producer, and the price of the seeds is 135 times the price of conventional !!
Above all, the yield depends on the quantity of rain, and not on technology.
I understand the helplessness of indian farmers, but technology leads to death, whereas organic farming, no matter how difficult, leads to rebirth...